Union Makes Reasonable Proposal

By way of letter dated December 22, 2009 the Union suggested to the employer that as the parties were close to resolving some issues, such as a drug plan, improvements to the hearing & vision and dental plans, plus a general wage increase for all members, the parties should allocate a portion of the $15,000,000 the employer said was available in 2010 to immediately improve member benefits in these areas.  The Union made clear in its letter, and reiterated to the employer at a January 12, 2010 meeting, that the Union proposal was to deal with issues where there was some common ground between the parties and that any employer response should not include issues where the parties were at odds.  The Union also made clear to the employer that an agreement to make some immediate improvements in wages and benefits would not prejudice either party in continuing negotiations or in their presentations to a third party interest arbitrator. 

 

EMPLOYER RESPONDS IN OFFENSIVE AND UNACCEPTABLE MANNER

Despite the reasonableness of the Union’s proposal, and its reminder that the intent of the proposal was to deal with issues where there was some commonality between the parties, the employer responded in a totally unacceptable and offensive manner.  By letter dated January 14, 2010  it indicated that it would only accept the proposal of the Union if the Union accepted the employer’s proposals concerning a short term disability plan, a corporate team incentive payment, wages increases based on regional “market realities” and the placement of an undefined amount of money in an “escrow” account.  These are proposals to which the Union has repeatedly told the employer it is not prepared to agree.

Making the employer proposal even more offensive was that it expected the Union’s Negotiating Committee to accept the short term disability plan and corporate team incentive payment without actually being told by the employer what impact these two proposals would have on the financial cap.

Although the employer’s unreasonable proposal was made to inflame negotiations, the Union responded by letter dated January 15, 2010 asking that the employer reconsider its position.

 

UNION REFERS UNRESOLVED MATTERS TO ARBITRATION

As the employer did not respond in a reasonable way to the Union proposal for interim improvements in wages and benefits, and as it has not responded favourably to any of the demands made by the Union during negotiations, the Union has decided to refer all outstanding demands to third party interest arbitration.  A letter was sent to the employer on January 20, 2010, advising it of the Union’s intent.  In the same letter the Union indicated that although it was referring unresolved issues to arbitration it was still available to negotiate with the employer, as the Union continues to believe that it is better for the parties to negotiate a collective agreement than to have one imposed by an arbitrator.

Unfortunately, it appears that the employer is not prepared to negotiate a collective agreement and would rather roll the dice at arbitration.  This is evident from its failure to drop or amend even one of its proposals.  Conversely, the Union has dropped three demands from its original package of demands and agreed in whole or in part with some of the proposals made by the employer.

During the arbitration process the Union will continue to strive for changes to the collective agreement that provide improvements in wages and benefits and improvements in the daily working lives of the RSMC members.

Throughout the arbitration process members should continue to show support for their demands, and their Negotiating Committee, by participating in activities coordinated by the Union and by keeping advised of events at negotiations by reading Union publications and accessing the Union’s website (www.cupw-sttp.org).

 

SHOP STEWARDS NEED TO BRING THIS INFORMATION TO THE ATTENTION OF THE MEMBERS DURING REGULAR WEEKLY SHOP FLOOR MEETINGS.